BG Matchmaking

Are you kabam as a company really just gonna sit there and pretend like you've done a good job with matchmaking in battlegrounds it's the most absurd thing ever and I'm sure the 30 yr olds in there moms basement will reply with skill issue but it's not if have a deck of rank 3 six stars it's insane to match me with dudes with multiple rank 3 7 stars all the new champs due to your absolute game breaking valiant offers I've been a very loyal player for years and I spend but this is just flat out stupid and annoying the idea that your not addressing this at all is hilarious

Comments

Giantwalrus56

Not going to say skill issue cause I obviously have no idea about ur skill level. That said, do you think you should be receiving same rewards as those bigger rosters? If your answer is yes, then you have to face them. If we're all competing for same prizes, why should smaller/less developed rosters get preferential treatment? Does it suck, yup. We were all there at some point. Just keep grinding

laserjohn26

I removed everything from your quote that wasn't incoherent nonsense and left the important part as an exact quote

Asher1_1

I am f2p paragon & getting matched with valiant players it sucks .I fought one guy who had r5 + Ascended serpant. Shows u can just buy the deal and get new champ + dust available in store .

But I know why they aren't working on matchmaking yet as the gap between Valiant and paragon increase they have other things to work on like :
1- 8.4 testing as expected in April
2- April monthly quest & side quest
3- wow next challenge + wow gauntlet in April
4- broken aw nodes and fixes
5- reasonable offers for 8.4 completion & exploration
6- champion rebalance testing , changing , testing
7- smaller bug fixes
8- sagas added more content to develop
9- more content area planned in advance like 6 months before so (August content is in works probably)

10 - most important kabam don't have enough employees to do all that so for now they just let the matchmaking as it is.

RiasGremory

Agree , not gonna play Battlegrounds anymore , not even for my Lovely Nightcrawler as a 7*

Just waste of Time and Ressources and at the end Kabam will Ban you for Losing too much ...

BringPopcorn

Lol what?... Why would they ban you for losing rofl

RiasGremory

Yeah some months ago they explained how to get banned in Battleground and there they said something like i said lol

BringPopcorn

.... For farming points and giving away losses to stay from moving up tiers...
Not for losing legit matches.

RiasGremory

Yes that too , but they also said what ive said

DNA3000

If you think Kabam said what you said, you either need to reread what Kabam said, or you don't understand your own words.

i13

I’m uncollected, and everyone I get matched against is higher.

I’ve some how made it to platinum and it’s been like that since the bronze tier.

I’m getting sick of playing against thronebreakers with the same decks…

dr doom, herc, fury, human touch, apocalypse, thing, scorpion…..

Does my nut in more when the matches are made up of

Me: 10’000 vs 40’000

Them: 20’000 vs 25’000

1 parry or intercepted medium attack and your dead in 1 combo…..

Balance issue is a huge problem, but when Kabam throw out characters like Hulking, everyone’s just gonna be shouting “take my money!!!”

DNA3000

If you're Uncollected, everyone allowed to participate in Battlegrounds at all is higher.

RiasGremory

Maybe you should try learn to read than you would know that they said what i said
Kabamlover..

Rayven5220

Clearly YOU need to learn how to read, because they have never once said you would be banned for losing legit matches.

Valroz

Why I don't understand the most is how at least 7/10 matches are with accounts almost double my size: I am 3M Paragon rating fighting accounts 5M+ Valiant rating. Are we low-mid tier Paragons now the new cattle for higher level Paragon accounts? It would be nice to be able to fight almost same level or lower level once in a while to have a chance at winning.

What sucks even more is when you're already paired with an account twice your rating, the choices you are provided during the selection are the worse possible champs you can pick, almost like the game is mocking you for no reason.

Maybe one of the better ways to address this issue is to have some kind of rating balancer so that you get almost equal ration or proportion of the kind of opponents you're facing. It shouldn't be more higher level matches that you should be getting.

SMH.

Rayven5220

I'm a 3.6 or so mil Valiant and get matched with 5+ mil accts all the time. So what?

I either win or I don't, and go to the next match, lol

Demonzfyre

Another day, another Doug.

DNA3000

Aw, is that the best you could come up with? What are you, twelve?

This is the post most people reference when it comes to Kabam's anti-cheating position for battlegrounds: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/351012/the-war-on-cheaters-update-november-2023/p1

This is the relevant section describing things that WONT get you flagged for cheating.

Not only has Kabam never said what you said, that losing a lot can get you banned, they explicitly stated that losing a lot or losing in long streaks will not, in and of itself, be detected as cheating.

Now, some ~~illiterates~~ players have completely misinterpreted the next section, believing these things are being defined as cheating:

But that's not what that section says. It says doing those things will not prevent players who cheat from being detected as cheating. It is no different than when someone says chewing breath mints will not prevent someone from being arrested for drunk driving. That doesn't mean chewing breath mints is illegal: that's ludicrous. It simply means anyone who thinks that will help them evade detection is being warned it doesn't work. So while it says, in particular, that losing many matches in a row at zero medals won't evade their anti-cheat detection systems, that doesn't mean losing many matches in a row is itself considered cheating. It just means if you attempt to do that to throw of the detectors (by trying to manipulate your win/loss data) it won't work.

Losing a lot by itself is not considered cheating because losing a lot by itself doesn't help anyone. There is no cheating strategy called "lose a lot, make profit." Losing is losing. It is only when someone tries to explicitly time their losses strategically as part of a larger scheme to manipulate the system that losing can be part of a cheating strategy. But no one losing a lot because they suck is ever going to accidentally fall into one of those strategies by dumb luck. Anti-cheat looks for the benefits of cheating, not the act of winning and losing itself.

Now, I'm sure in your little cabal of teenage gigglers saying stuff like "kabamlover..." wins you lots of points. But one day you're going to have to live in the adult world, and in the adult world you're going to run into people who know a lot more than you do about, well, probably everything in your case. In this instance, you have the misfortune of running into someone that knows just about everything there is to know about the Battlegrounds game mode, and has read basically every single public statement Kabam has made about the mode. Also, I talk to the developers often, including those working with the anti-cheat team at Kabam. So I have a pretty good idea of what Kabam considers to be cheating, and what they've said about their position on cheating. But if you think you actually have an actual quote to back up your assertions that I've either never read or have forgotten about, I challenge you to post it. Because if all you have is you heard from a friend of a friend that everyone knows this, then you get placed into the same bucket with people who think Kabam rigs crystal drops and the Flat Earth Society.

Keltan

Just do it for the tokens so you can rank up more champs and become stronger, clear more story content and become Paragon.

RiasGremory

Read point 3 5 and 6 IQ less kid

Rayven5220

You obviously should read the points that YOU pointed out, genius.

Reading is hard for you, isn't it?